THE CONSERVATOR AND CUSTODIAN OF FOREST & ORS. versus SOBHA JOHN KOSHY & ANR.

Citation: [2021] 2 S.C.R. 94 · Decided: 10-02-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ASHOK BHUSHAN · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
94
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 2 S.C.R.
   [2021] 2 S.C.R. 94
94
THE CONSERVATOR AND CUSTODIAN OF FOREST & ORS.
v.
SOBHA JOHN KOSHY & ANR.
(Civil Appeal No. 414 of 2021)
FEBRUARY 10, 2021
[ASHOK BHUSHAN, R. SUBHASH REDDY AND
M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
Kerala Private Forest (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 –
s.8 – Respondents filed application in the Forest Tribunal u/s.8 for
declaration that the lands were not vested forest – Rejected –
Eventually, High Court declared that the land did not vest in the
Govt. – However, land could not be restored to respondents – Later
it was decided that instead of restoration of the land, compensation
be paid to land owners whose land could not be restored – Agreed
by respondents – Writ Petition filed by the respondents that either
they may be restored the original land or compensation be paid as
assessed by District Tehsildar – Allowed by Single Judge – Writ
appeal dismissed – Held: Subject land is ecologically fragile land
and is now vested in the Govt. – As per s.8, 2003 Act in respect of
land which is vested in the Govt. u/s.3(1), 2003 Act, no compensation
is payable – But the right on land lost by the respondents under
2003 Act shall not wipe out their right to enjoy the possession and
yield of the land prior to 2003 enactment, which right was held to
be established by the High Court – Respondents entitled to
compensation to the extent of 50% of value of the land as computed
by Tehsildar and noted in the judgment of Single Judge – Kerala
Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands)
Act, 2003 – ss.2(b), 3, 4, 8.
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 It is undisputed that the subject land, which
was claimed to be vested with the Government under Act, 1971
was not ultimately accepted and Kerala High Court allowed the
objection of the land owners declaring that land is not covered
under the Act, 1971 and has been exempted from Act, 1971. The
order of the Forest Tribunal was set aside. Result of the judgment
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
95
of the High Court was that the respondents were entitled for
immediate restoration of their land. Further, there is no dispute
that land could not be restored to the respondents and some
alternative proposals were submitted including allotment of
alternative land at three different places. Allotment of alternative
land was not possible as was communicated by Forest authorities.
Divisional Forest Officer had informed the Conservator of Forests
that owners suggested that they are prepared to accept the
compensation for the land. The High Court informed that a
communication has been received from the Tehsildar of the
District Collector, Wayanad where Tehsildar has assessed the
value of the land as Rs. 1000/- per cent covered by O.A. No. 67
of 1976 and Rs. 800/- per cent of the land covered by O.A. No.68
of 1975. The Single Judge, thus, allowed the writ petition directing
payment of compensation as per computation by the Tehsildar.
[Paras 7, 8][100-F-G; 101-B-D]
1.2 Under Section 2(b), Kerala Forest (Vesting and
Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003
“ecologically fragile lands” has been defined. As per Section 3,
ecologically fragile land is to vest in the Government. Section 4
further empowers the Government to declare ecologically fragile
land. There is no dispute in the present case that a notification
has already been issued notifying the subject land as ecologically
fragile land vide notification published on 12.03.2007. The
notification dated 12.03.2007 is not under challenge. It has been
submitted by the respondents that neither they are challenging
the validity of vires of Act, 2003 nor they are challenging the
notification dated 12.03.2007. Thus, there is no option but to
accept that subject land is ecologically fragile land and is now
vested in the Government. As per Section 8 of the Act, 2003 in
respect of land, which is vested in the Government under Section
3(1) of The Act, 2003, no compensation is payable. The present
is a case where the respondents claim is not based on any
compensation under the Act, 2003. The Single Judge directed
for payment of compensation to the respondents in view of
adjudication under Act, 1971 where it was held after prolonged
litigation that land is not covered by Act, 1971 and the respondents
THE CONSERVATOR AND CUSTODIAN OF FOREST v.
SOBHA JOHN KOSHY & ANR.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
96
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 2 S.C.R.
are the owner of the land, entitled to restoration of possess

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.